Eternally Begotten and Psalms 2:7

[food4thought]

I have been wrestling with the doctrine of the Son being eternally begotten according to the Nicene Creed. Aside from being difficult philosophically, there are Bible passages that say Christ was begotten at a specific time (Psalms 2:7; Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5; Hebrews 5:5).

So I'm asking for help in understanding it philosophically, as well as exegesis of the passages listed above. Thanks in advance;

Michael

-------------------EDIT----------------------

I wholeheartedly agree with the eternal Deity of Christ, the Word of God, and that Jesus Christ is the Word of God. My question revolves around the idea of His being "begotten of the Father before all ages", which is the Nicene Creed. How does this line up with Psalms 2:7 and it's usage in the NT? Sorry for not being more clear originally.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I have been wrestling with the doctrine of the Son being eternally begotten according to the Nicene Creed. Aside from being difficult philosophically, there are Bible passages that say Christ was begotten at a specific time (Psalms 2:7; Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5; Hebrews 5:5).

So I'm asking for help in understanding it philosophically, as well as exegesis of the passages listed above. Thanks in advance;

Michael

Hey food4thought,

I was just perusing the way in which the Nicene Creed is articulated, and while I'm no authority on it at present, I'm not seeing anything in it specifically stating that "the Son is eternally begotten." Or at least I'm not seeing this in the version that CF has in its Statement of Faith.

So far, I simply take it that Jesus, in His fleshly Incarnation, was begotten by God at a certain time, but that this in no way also means that the God the Logos was also 'begotten' by God. So, for me, in philosophical and thereafter theological terms, this means that Jesus, in His pre-Incarnate existence is Eternally Existent, but that His Incarnation in the flesh isn't, although we might say that the Incarnation now has an Infinite nature and value as it now inheres to our view of the Logos. It's kind of a paradox really, humanly speaking. But in my saying this, we just have to be philosophically aware that the term Infinite is not equivalent to the term Eternal: they are different in nuance of meaning.

Of course, I could be wrong. I could be very wrong, and on this particular mystery of our common faith, I won't even attempt to preside or pontificate some final insight that I don't think I really have.

What are your thoughts on this, brother?

 

[food4thought]

Hey food4thought,

I was just perusing the way in which the Nicene Creed is articulated, and while I'm no authority on it at present, I'm not seeing anything in it specifically stating that "the Son is eternally begotten." Or at least I'm not seeing this in the version that CF has in its Statement of Faith.

CF SoF does say this:

"Begotten of the Father before all ages."

Another version I found on the web (http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/history/nicene381.html) says this:

"eternally begotten of the Father,"

So far, I simply take it that Jesus, in His fleshly Incarnation, was begotten by God at a certain time,

Totally agree, but wish I didn't. Isn't this view divergent from the idea that He was begotten "before all ages"?

but that this in no way also means that the God the Logos was also 'begotten' by God.

Agreed.

So, for me, in philosophical and thereafter theological terms, this means that Jesus, in His pre-Incarnate existence is Eternally Existent,

Right.

but that His Incarnation in the flesh isn't,

I follow and agree.

although we might say that the Incarnation now has an Infinite nature and value as it now inheres to our view of the Logos.

Correct.

It's kind of a paradox really, humanly speaking.

I don't really see a paradox. A finite being can become infinite if God wills it to be so.

But in my saying this, we just have to be philosophically aware that the term Infinite is not equivalent to the term Eternal: they are different in nuance of meaning.

Totally agree.

Of course, I could be wrong. I could be very wrong, and on this particular mystery of our common faith, I won't even attempt to preside or pontificate some final insight that I don't think I really have.

I think you are missing where my problem is. I am trying to reconcile the idea that the Son was begotten at a specific point in time with the Nicene Creed's statement that He was begotten "eternally" or "from all ages". I am attracted to the view that the Word was begotten at the Incarnation, but the creed seems to think differently, and I don't know why. I know they were trying to protect the full Deity of Christ... but eternally begotten, or begotten from all ages, seems to contradict Psalms 2:7 (and the NT verses that quote it).

What are your thoughts on this, brother?

That's what I am worried about. I am currently liking the teaching that is known as Incarnational Sonship (IS), but I don't want to contradict the Nicene Creed. I am trying to better understand the orthodox view of how and when the Son was begotten, so I can hopefully discard my infatuation with IS. That is why I asked for a philosophical defense of eternal sonship (I found several on the web, but they were not very convincing to me), and, more importantly, for an apologetic exegesis of the verses that are used to support IS (which I have not been able to find yet).

Thanks in advance for your help;

Michael

 

[Rubiks]

I take Jesus' "begotteness" to refer to his incarnation.

"Begotten" suggests Jesus came into existence. (even if its understood to be an anthropomorphic metaphor)

 

[food4thought]

I take Jesus' "begotteness" to refer to his incarnation.

Thank you Rubiks, I agree.

"Begotten" suggests Jesus came into existence.

Right. Jesus came into being, but the eternal Word did not (at least, that is how I understand it).

(even if its understood to be an anthropomorphic metaphor)

Could you elaborate on that?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

CF SoF does say this:

"Begotten of the Father before all ages."

Another version I found on the web (http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/history/nicene381.html) says this:

"eternally begotten of the Father,"o

That's problematic here in that CF doesn't use that version of the Nicene Creed, as far as I can tell. (Or have I missed something somewhere?)

Totally agree, but wish I didn't. Isn't this view divergent from the idea that He was begotten "before all ages"?

It sounds like it. But are you bothered that CF doesn't rely on that, or are you instead grappling with your own questions about the nature of Jesus?

I think you are missing where my problem is. I am trying to reconcile the idea that the Son was begotten at a specific point in time with the Nicene Creed's statement that He was begotten "eternally" or "from all ages". I am attracted to the view that the Word was begotten at the Incarnation, but the creed seems to think differently, and I don't know why. I know they were trying to protect the full Deity of Christ... but eternally begotten, or begotten from all ages, seems to contradict Psalms 2:7 (and the NT verses that quote it).

Well.......................since I have typically run around in "Restorationist" circles, and their views on creeds are that they are essentially tertiary in value to the Christian faith, I may not be much help. I'd be more concerned with our hermeneutical understanding of the New Testament rather than with how one articulation about the nature of Christ came about at one particular (post-apostolic) time in the history of the Church.

That's what I am worried about. I am currently liking the teaching that is known as Incarnational Sonship (IS), but I don't want to contradict the Nicene Creed. I am trying to better understand the orthodox view of how and when the Son was begotten, so I can hopefully discard my infatuation with IS. That is why I asked for a philosophical defense of eternal sonship (I found several on the web, but they were not very convincing to me), and, more importantly, for an apologetic exegesis of the verses that are used to support IS (which I have not been able to find yet).

My take on it is that the actual essence of Jesus' humanity came when Mary arrived on the scene in human history, but before that there was just the Trinity, within which resides God, the Logos. HOWEVER, if the Logos is God---and we know He is---then He would have known what He would do and what He would be within His creation ("beforehand") upon becoming a human Savior. So, in that 'sense,' we might say that Jesus was, or has been begotten, from within God's Eternal Being.

Thanks in advance for your help;

Michael

You're welcome.

 

[Tigger45]

John 1:1-3

 

[food4thought]

That's problematic here in that CF doesn't use that version of the Nicene Creed, as far as I can tell. (Or have I missed something somewhere?)

The statement of faith says "Begotten of the Father before all ages", which essentially means "eternally begotten".

It sounds like it. But are you bothered that CF doesn't rely on that, or are you instead grappling with your own questions about the nature of Jesus?

It definitely sounds like it to me. I am bothered that I diverge from what is commonly held as orthodoxy, and am wrestling with how to personally understand how and when Jesus was begotten. I am thinking about becoming a pastor, and I don't want to mislead anyone.

Well.......................since I have typically run around in "Restorationist" circles, and their views on creeds are that they are essentially tertiary in value to the Christian faith, I may not be much help.

I hold the early creeds in high regard, yet I really struggle with this issue and with the later councils (especially Chalcedon). There are many churches that think of the Nicene Creed as a litmus test for orthodoxy, and I don't want to be labeled as a heretic. The later creeds don't mean as much to the modern church, so I don't mind struggling with them, but the Nicene Creed is still very important to most.

I'd be more concerned with our hermeneutical understanding of the New Testament rather than with how one articulation about the nature of Christ came about at one particular (post-apostolic) time in the history of the Church.

That's what I think, also. Yet you have to admit that the Nicene Creed is a formulation that still holds weight with most Christians.

My take on it is that the actual essence of Jesus' humanity came when Mary arrived on the scene in human history, but before that there was just the Trinity, within which resides God, the Logos.

I agree.

HOWEVER, if the Logos is God---and we know He is---then He would have known what He would do and what He would be within His creation ("beforehand") upon becoming a human Savior. So, in that 'sense,' we might say that Jesus was, or has been begotten, from within God's Eternal Being.

Right. That helps a little. Jesus' Incarnation was a foreknown fact from all eternity, so in that sense He was begotten from all ages... at least I can agree with the letter of the creed now, if not it's original intent. Thank you.

But that still leaves unresolved how Psalms 2:7 and it's NT usage lines up with the Creed.

You're welcome.

God bless you.

 

[food4thought]

John 1:1-3

Not sure how this is supposed to answer my questions... I believe in the full, eternal Deity of the Word of God, who is Christ.

 

[Tigger45]

Not sure how this is supposed to answer my questions... I believe in the full, eternal Deity of the Word of God, who is Christ.

John 1:1-3


When we call Jesus the only-begotten Son we speak of the unique relationship He has to the Father. Which is understood, via the Nicene Creed, to be of His eternal generation from the Father, as God of God.

We do not mean that Jesus was procreated by God the Father in a biological sense meaning that Jesus has His Source and Origin in the Father, uniquely, as the eternal and un-created Word.

 

[food4thought]

John 1:1-3

I have no problem with John 1:1-3. The Word is God, eternal and co-equal with the Father.

When we call Jesus the only-begotten Son we speak of the unique relationship He has to the Father. Which is understood, via the Nicene Creed, to be of His eternal generation from the Father, as God of God.

Generation implies beginning... how can an uncreated, eternal Being such as the Word be generated from anyone or anything?

We do not mean that Jesus was procreated by God the Father in a biological sense meaning that Jesus has His Source and Origin in the Father, uniquely, as the eternal and un-created Word.

Aside from the Nicene Creed, is there anything Biblical that would deny that the Word was Incarnated at a certain point in history, being begotten at that time as the man Jesus Christ at His conception? I ask this because that is what Psalms 2:7 (and Hebrews 1:5, and Hebrews 5:5) appears to say...

 

[food4thought]

Upon further reflection, Acts 13:33 seems to indicate that Paul saw the begottenness of Jesus Christ as referring to His resurrection, or perhaps His coronation as King in heaven shortly after (Revelation 5)? Hebrews is unclear as to timing. Maybe the Incarnation is not in view in these passages after all... I still wonder about how these passages fit with the Nicene Creed, though. Help would still be greatly appreciated.

 

[food4thought]

I really need help reconciling Psalms 2:7 (and it's NT usage in Acts and Hebrews) with the Nicene Creed's statement of "begotten before all ages".

 

[icxn]

I really need help reconciling Psalms 2:7 (and it's NT usage in Acts and Hebrews) with the Nicene Creed's statement of "begotten before all ages".

Those verses speak of His generation in time, i.e. the incarnation. His eternal generation is spoken of in LXX Psalm 109*:

1 The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. 2 The Lord shall send out a rod of power for thee out of Sion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. 3 With thee is dominion in the day of thy power, in the splendours of thy saints: from the womb before the morning star have I begotten thee. 4 The Lord sware, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec.​

Also LXX Proverbs 8:

22 The Lord made me the beginning of his ways for his works. 23 He established me before time [was] in the beginning, before he made the earth: 24 even before he made the depths; before the fountains of water came forth: 25 before the mountains were settled, and before all hills, he begets me. 26 The Lord made countries and uninhabited [tracks], and the highest inhabited parts of the world. 27 When he prepared the heaven, I was present with him; and when he prepared his throne upon the winds: 28 and when he strengthened the clouds above; and when he secured the fountains of the earth: 29 [see Appendix] and when he strengthened the foundations of the earth: 30 I was by him, suiting [myself to him], I was that wherein he took delight; and daily I rejoiced in his presence continually.​

________
* MSS 110 varies

 

[food4thought]

Those verses speak of His generation in time, i.e. the incarnation. His eternal generation is spoken of

So you see Him as being begotten in two senses... interesting. I guess that would reconcile the passages. Thank you, that helps a little.

in LXX Psalm 109*:

You mean Psalms 110... happens to all of us.

1 The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. 2 The Lord shall send out a rod of power for thee out of Sion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. 3 With thee is dominion in the day of thy power, in the splendours of thy saints: from the womb before the morning star have I begotten thee. 4 The Lord sware, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec.​

Also LXX Proverbs 8:

22 The Lord made me the beginning of his ways for his works. 23 He established me before time [was] in the beginning, before he made the earth: 24 even before he made the depths; before the fountains of water came forth: 25 before the mountains were settled, and before all hills, he begets me. 26 The Lord made countries and uninhabited [tracks], and the highest inhabited parts of the world. 27 When he prepared the heaven, I was present with him; and when he prepared his throne upon the winds: 28 and when he strengthened the clouds above; and when he secured the fountains of the earth: 29 [see Appendix] and when he strengthened the foundations of the earth: 30 I was by him, suiting [myself to him], I was that wherein he took delight; and daily I rejoiced in his presence continually.​

​

I generally don't trust the accuracy of our manuscripts of the LXX... it diverges so frequently from the Hebrew text. But this is interesting... especially Proverbs 8 which is very similar in the Hebrew text, but I've never been entirely sold on Proverbs 8 being more than typologically related to Christ.

 

[icxn]

...
You mean Psalms 110... happens to all of us.

It wasn't a mistake, I did mention it in the footnote after all. The LXX numbering of the psalms is different from that of the MSS.

I generally don't trust the accuracy of our manuscripts of the LXX... it diverges so frequently from the Hebrew text. But this is interesting... especially Proverbs 8 which is very similar in the Hebrew text, but I've never been entirely sold on Proverbs 8 being more than typologically related to Christ.

It's not a typology. Christ is the Wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:24).

 

[food4thought]

It wasn't a mistake, I did mention it in the footnote after all. The LXX numbering of the psalms is different from that of the MSS.

Sorry, I misunderstood that.

It's not a typology. Christ is the Wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:24).

Exegetically, I think using 1 Corinthians 1:24 to support that view is a bit of a stretch... it also says the Christ is the power of God. Also, Proverbs 8:22 is problematic [the Hebrew word usually translated as "possessed" has the meaning of "brought forth" or "created" (see NIV)]. But that is another subject, and I understand where you are coming from, and know many believe the same.

You have really been helpful in bringing to my mind the idea of Christ being both eternally begotten and temporally begotten, though, thanks.

 

[Yekcidmij]

I have been wrestling with the doctrine of the Son being eternally begotten according to the Nicene Creed. Aside from being difficult philosophically, there are Bible passages that say Christ was begotten at a specific time (Psalms 2:7; Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5; Hebrews 5:5).

So I'm asking for help in understanding it philosophically, as well as exegesis of the passages listed above. Thanks in advance;

Michael

I take Psalm 2 to be a coronation Psalm for the king in general - not as an ontological statement about the 2nd person of the Trinity.

 

[food4thought]

I take Psalm 2 to be a coronation Psalm for the king in general - not as an ontological statement about the 2nd person of the Trinity.

Thanks for the replay, Yekcidmij. It seems that is the original context of Psalm 2, but how do you reconcile that with the way the Psalm is used in the NT?

 

[Yekcidmij]

Thanks for the replay, Yekcidmij. It seems that is the original context of Psalm 2, but how do you reconcile that with the way the Psalm is used in the NT?

I would have to look at a specific instance, but I'm not sure they are using that Psalm for anything more than stating Jesus' position as Messiah. Hebrews 1 may be the best bet for a different use of the Psalm, but even here it's only being used to argue about Jesus' superiority to angels (as well as all who inherit salvation 1:14) and isn't making an ontological statement about the 2nd person of the Trinity.